Madras High Court
C.Nesam Joseph vs The Inspector Of Police on 28 March, 2024
Author: M.Dhandapani
Bench: M.Dhandapani
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15007 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED:28.03.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15007 of 2022
and
Crl.M.P(MD) Nos.9799 and 9800 of 2022
C.Nesam Joseph ... Petitioner/Sole Accused
Vs.
1.The Inspector of Police,
Nachiyarpuram Police Station,
Sivagangai District.
In Crime No.10 of 2022. ...1st Respondent/Complainant
2.Santhi ...2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant
Prayer: The Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C., to call for the records relating to C.C.No.60 of 2022 on the file of
the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppathur and
quash the same as illegal.
For Petitioner : Mr.Yogeswaran
For R1 : Mr.P.Kottaichamy,
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
For R2 : Mr.S.Bharathy Kannan
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15007 of 2022
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in
C.C.No.60 of 2022 on the file of the learned District Munsif Cum
Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppathur.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the second respondent
belongs to Scheduled Community. The petitioner is the village President
of the Karukudi Panchayat, Thiruppathur Tauk, Sivagangai District,
where the second respondent is living for the past 30 years. On
11.01.2022, when the defacto complainant had gone to Karaikudi, the
accused along with few unknown persons damaged her house and also
broken the water connection. Further, the accused has not given the
house tax receipt to the second respondent for several years. When the
second respondent returned to her house, the accused person scolded her
using her caste name. Hence, the second respondent made a complaint
before the first respondent Police and the first respondent Police
registered a case in Crime No.10 of 2022 against the petitioner and the
respondent Police conducted the investigation and on completion of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15007 of 2022
investigation, the charge sheet has been filed before the learned District
Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppathur and the learned Judicial
Magistrate has taken cognizance in C.C.No.66 of 2022 for the alleged
offence punishable under Sections 448 and 427 of I.P.C as against the
petitioner.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit
that a false case has been foisted against the petitioner, since an
encroachment made by the defacto complainant was removed by the
accused in the official capacity. Hence, he prays to allow this petition.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that
there are materials available to proceed with the case as against the
petitioner herein and at the threshold, the criminal proceedings cannot be
quashed and the charges against the petitioner have to be gone into only
at the time of trial and hence, he prayed for dismissal of the petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15007 of 2022
5.In the above circumstances, the trial Court has rightly taken the
case on file and this Court is of the considered view that no prejudice
would be caused to the petitioner, if he is subjected to due trial as
sufficient opportunity would be given to the petitioner to put forth his
defence. The petitioner cannot be let by quashing the charges framed
against him as that would completely undermine the alleged act, which is
the subject matter of criminal trial pending against him. Useful reference
in this regard can be made to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in
State of Haryana – Vs - Bhajan Lal (1992 SCC (Crl.) 426).
6. For the reasons aforesaid, this Court finds no ground or scope to
quash C.C.No.60 of 2022 pending on the file of the learned District
Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppathur. Accordingly, this
Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected
Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15007 of 2022
7.At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
would submit that this Court may consider to dispense with the personal
appearance of the petitioner before the Court below. Taking into
consideration the request as made by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, the appearance of the petitioner before the trial court is
dispensed with except for his appearance for the purpose of receiving the
copy of the proceedings u/s.207 Cr.P.C., framing of charges, questioning
under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and on the day on which judgment is to be
pronounced. However, if for any particular reason, the presence of the
petitioner is necessary, the trial Court, at its wisdom, shall direct his
appearance on those days.
28.03.2024
NCC:Yes/No
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Indu
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15007 of 2022
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
Indu
To:
1.The Inspector of Police,
Nachiyarpuram Police Station,
Sivagangai District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.15007 of 2022
28.03.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
